Chamber of Pharmacists sharply criticized for alleged corruption and retaliation at public hearing

The Alabama State Board of Pharmacy (ABOP) was subjected to nearly two hours of questioning by lawmakers on Thursday after a recently released report found numerous “significant problems” in the board’s operations and alleged retaliation against licensees.

The report from the Alabama Examiner of Public Accounts was compiled ahead of Thursday's Sunset Committee meeting, during which lawmakers consider licensing committees that require legislative approval to continue.

SEE: ‘Horrible management practices and governance’: Alabama Pharmacy Board in trouble after audit report reveals a litany of ‘significant problems’

At Thursday's meeting, several lawmakers, advocates and lawyers pointed out that the report did not paint a flattering picture of ABOP.

ABOP report by Craig Monger on Scribd

First, ABOP Executive Director Donna Yeatman delivered a speech to the committee in which she seemingly preemptively exonerated the body's reputation and provided a laudatory description of the body and its practices, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“The committee takes its responsibility to ensure the safety of Alabama's patients very seriously,” Yeatman said. “We are confident that every citizen of Alabama can rely on this committee because every action this committee takes, every rule it issues or changes, and every disciplinary action it takes is guided by the committee's mission to protect the citizens of Alabama.”

The state auditors' report uncovered several instances of “significant problems” at ABOP, including the way the company reported income, excessive fines, charging unspecified fees, charging unlicensed businesses, meeting minutes that did not match board actions, violations of Alabama's Open Meetings Act, failure to take oaths of office with the Secretary of State's office, failure to promptly file receipts, violations of state competitive bidding rules, inaccurate invoicing, overpaying suppliers for the amount contracted for and improper procurement of supplies and services.

Yeatman briefly addressed the issues in her introduction, agreeing with the examiners' findings on some of the less important issues but disagreeing with them on the more important ones.

Referring to the anonymous pharmacists, Yeatman explained that questionnaire respondents represented only a small proportion of the state's pharmacists and therefore assumed that “the overwhelming majority” were satisfied with the panel and its actions.

Several members of the public also spoke out, some praising the board and its mission and policies, while others slammed ABOP with allegations ranging from taxpayer dollars to excessive fines aimed at lining the pockets of board members.

Jamie Moncus, a Birmingham attorney, represented a pharmacist named Billy East. Moncus said East, a pharmacy employee, had his license wrongfully revoked by ABOP under a DEA law that applied to the pharmacy, not to an individual pharmacist. Moncus claimed he tried to appeal the decision before Yeatman and two of the board's attorneys, only to be met with laughter.

“I soon found out they were never interested in applying the law,” Moncus said. “They were not interested in the truth at all. They were only interested in grudges.”

Moncus also accused the panel of indicting witnesses to exonerate East and prevent her from testifying. He said the attorney general needed to step in and drop the charges to restore East's license. East sued the panel. The complaint is below.

Lawsuit against Billy East. by Craig Monger on Scribd

Attorney Joseph Kreps, who boasted that he had represented pharmacists before this body for nearly twenty years, condemned ABOP in the most passionate and vehement manner, accusing the organization of enriching itself through arbitrary penalties and fines against pharmacists.

“The pharmacy board's funds are not visible,” Kreps said. “In 2023, the licensing fees collected by this board were $4.4 million, of which nearly $4 million was spent on administrative salaries and benefits alone. These board members are paid. They make a fortune being on this board. This is wrong. They pocketed a total of $325,000 in salary and per diems, and travel expenses were over $210,000. They extort $1 million annually from these licensees through unlawful fines and junk fees. Late fees increased nearly 1,500% from 2013 to 2022.”

He continued: “They don't care about the licensees at all. All they care about is collecting money and putting it in their own pockets.”

In one case in the audit report, a company had failed to report a change of ownership within the permitted time period. The Committee offered the company two options: Option one was for the company to sign a consent agreement (which is a reportable offense) and pay a fine of $2,000 per permit, for a total of $4,000. Option two was for the company to sign a deferment agreement (which is a non-reportable offense) and pay administrative costs of $5,000 per permit, for a total of $10,000.

“This is extortion,” Kreps said. “The other problem, in my opinion, is that these board members are collecting illegal fines and fees, junk fees, and they're funneling that money to themselves.”

“This is not professional regulation. This is, in my opinion, organized crime and extortion. And it's all written in black and white,” he continued.

MEPs on the committee asked Yeatman detailed questions about the auditors' report and asked for clarification on the serious problems identified. Their questions were answered. However, several MEPs raised serious concerns about the report and ABOP's actions, while recognising the importance of the body's regulatory role.

“This is one of the worst reports, and I haven't been on the Sunset Committee long, but it is one of the worst reports, if not the worst, that I have ever seen,” said State Senator Sam Givhan (R-Huntsville). “I would recommend that the committee get to work immediately to fix these problems.”

According to state Rep. Kerry Underwood (Republican of Tuscumbia), the panel's actions give the appearance of “pay-to-play.”

“I know this is the sunset committee, but there is a lack of transparency in your program, in your department and in your committee,” said Rep. Matt Simpson (R-Daphne). “I'm not saying you sweep things under the rug. It looks like if you sweep things under the rug, then we wouldn't be able to see these things.”

State Senator Keith Kelley (R-Anniston) stated emphatically that if this report had been presented to a lesser body, it would have been a disaster, meaning the legislature would likely have voted against extending this authority.

“When I look at this, to say I’m concerned is an extreme understatement,” Kelley said.

To contact the author of this story or to leave a comment, send an email to [email protected].

Don't miss anything! Subscribe to our newsletter and receive our top stories every weekday morning.